:quality(80)/cdn-kiosk-api.telegraaf.nl/2e9c31f4-6e17-11ec-a83d-02d1dbdc35d1.jpg?fit=%2C&ssl=1)
The Council of State (RvS) warns about this in an advisory report on the bill proposed by GL leader Jesse Klaver and PvdD leader Esther Ouwehand to introduce a fireworks ban.
The RvS is shooting holes in that proposal. For example, Klaver and Ouwehand suggested that consumers should still agree on some types of fireworks from the heavier category F2 or F3. But that will become unenforceable, warns the Council of State, after which the left-wing leaders remove that exception from their proposal and go for a general ban.
Another concern of the senior legal adviser is the so-called ‘waterbed effect’. In recent years, when there was a fireworks ban because of corona, many Dutch people already crossed the border to stock their arrows and pots in our neighboring countries.
Ban doesn’t solve problem
“This ‘waterbed effect’ will become even more pronounced in the event of a total ban and therefore has important implications for the efforts that supervisors and enforcers will have to make,” states the Council of State. According to the advice, Klaver and Ouwehand have ‘insufficiently motivated’ how the police should enforce this purchase across the border. Moreover, a ban does not solve the problem of illegal fireworks, the RvS points out.
Klaver and Ouwehand acknowledge the latter, but do not consider it an argument for accepting the serious consequences of consumer fireworks. They only answer the criticism about the ‘waterbed effect’ by stating that they have now included ‘the importance of adequate enforcement’ ‘even more emphatically’ in their proposal.
:quality(50)/cdn-kiosk-api.telegraaf.nl/2ead4ea8-6e17-11ec-a83d-02d1dbdc35d1.jpg)
—
Does the fireworks tradition still have a future? Four young Telegraaf journalists discuss this in the podcast Generation T.:
—
